1. The defendant,

A. 10,500,000 won for Plaintiff A;

B. 10,200,000 won against Plaintiff B;

C. Plaintiff C: KRW 7,670,000, D.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendant Company and retired from office as an employee from December 1, 201 to February 29, 2012. The Plaintiffs provided labor to and retired from the Defendant Company. Plaintiff A was not paid KRW 10,500,000 for Plaintiff B; KRW 10,200,00 for Plaintiff C; KRW 7,670,00 for Plaintiff C; KRW 650,000 for Plaintiff D; KRW 6,600,00 for Plaintiff E; KRW 6,600 for Plaintiff F; KRW 6,200,00 for Plaintiff F; KRW 3,060,00 for Plaintiff H; and KRW 3,120,00 for Plaintiff I was not paid.

B. On April 3, 2014, the Defendant Company transferred KRW 60,000,000 among the remodeling claims against the Defendant Company’s K hotel representative L to the Plaintiff Company’s K hotel representative L, and notified L of the said assignment of claims around October 2014.

C. Meanwhile, L was under rehabilitation proceedings with Daegu District Court 2014dan133, and Plaintiff A reported the above claim that was transferred from the Defendant Company in the said rehabilitation proceedings on November 2014 as rehabilitation claims.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant company is obligated to pay to the plaintiff A 10,50,000 won, 10,670,000 won to the plaintiff C, 6,500,000 won to the plaintiff C, 6,500,000 won to the plaintiff E, 6,600,000 won to the plaintiff F, and 6,200,000 won to the plaintiff F, and 3,060,0000 won to the plaintiff H, and 3,120,000 won to the plaintiff I, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum under the Labor Standards Act from March 15, 2012 to the date of full payment, which is 14 days after the retirement of the plaintiffs.

B. As to the assertion of the Defendant Company, the Defendant Company, instead of paying the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay wages to the Plaintiffs, transferred KRW 60,000,000, out of the remodelling payment claim against L by the Defendant Company’s K Hotel representative L, and the Plaintiff Company reported the above takeover claim as rehabilitation claim in the rehabilitation case against L as a rehabilitation claim, asserts that the claim and the obligation relationship between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant Company were terminated.

l.p. g., p.